Nelia wrote:
Maybe if you have stated that you were turned off by Photographers that only shoot Nudes that continually harass models trying to convince them to shoot nudes when they have clearly stated that they do not,  you might have gotten some sympathy and people that agreed with you.  But you did not, basically insulted every Photographer whose port is all Nudes and then had to add to you story to try and justify your original question.

You are right. I apologize for not stating all of that at once. I didn't think i would have struck a nerve in anyone. Just woul have gotten some insteresting opinions.
In response to your other paragraph about the rascist statement, i believe that any photographer that says he or she wouldnt shoot someone of "color" is rascist.  But i wouldnt respond because im sure there are some that dont.  Trust me, i did not mean to upset anyone.

Jay Farrell wrote:
Usually only models who are too chicken or morally superior to consider nudes would judge a photographer who shoots them. To most reasonable people, whether it's their preference or not, it shouldn't matter if they can do what they need for them.

+1k

Erika Muse wrote:

You are right. I apologize for not stating all of that at once. I didn't think i would have struck a nerve in anyone. Just woul have gotten some insteresting opinions.
In response to your other paragraph about the rascist statement, i believe that any photographer that says he or she wouldnt shoot someone of "color" is rascist.  But i wouldnt respond because im sure there are some that dont.  Trust me, i did not mean to upset anyone.

But she didn't say that, it was only an example used to compare to the generalizations you made

Jay Farrell wrote:

But she didn't say that, it was only an example used to compare to the generalizations you made

the model didnt say it, the photographer in the example did

Erika Muse wrote:
Am i the only model that gets turned off by photographers that shoot nudes ONLY.

MelissaAnn wrote:
How would you feel if somebody started a thread that said:
"Am I the only photographer that gets turned off by models of color who are between the ages of 18-25?" Making broad generalizing statements like that can be very insulting, do you not agree?

Sure, everyone has a right to their own opinion, but some opinions should be kept to yourself and dealt with in a productive manner- like saying "no thanks" and moving on.

Erika Muse wrote:
That example was racist. Her example would have come out of a racist mouth.  I have other characteristics that she could have used in an example. I was stating my opinion of her comment, but im far from sensitive. She is right in her point, but also wrong for her example.

Don Garrett wrote:
I would argue that there is nothing racist about MelissaAnn's statement, it was just to illustrate a point, and she used a couple of your characteristics to make the point. Of course you understood the point, but I think you are being too sensitive in this case. Sorry if this doesn't sit well with you, but that is my opinion.

Erika Muse wrote:
In response to your other paragraph about the rascist statement, i believe that any photographer that says he or she wouldnt shoot someone of "color" is rascist.  But i wouldnt respond because im sure there are some that dont.  Trust me, i did not mean to upset anyone.

Jay Farrell wrote:
But she didn't say that, it was only an example used to compare to the generalizations you made

Erika Muse wrote:
the model didnt say it, the photographer in the example did

It was a hypothetical example that shows how easily people can be offended by generalized statements like the one you (or the photographer in my example) made. 
You were offended, and you proved my point.  My example was *only* hypothetical, and does not reflect my real feelings. Imagine how many people you have offended by your example that actually *does* reflect your real feelings about photographers that shoot only nudes. The moral of the story is to be considerate of *other* people's feelings as you would want them to be considerate of yours.

Erika Muse wrote:
the model didnt say it, the photographer in the example did

Not quite..
The post actually said

[qt]turned off by models of color who are between the ages of 18-25[/qt]

So theoretically speaking he/she could be turned on by 'model of colour' over the age of 25..which would I am pretty sure not be racist...possibly ageist though..

Harpy_image wrote:

Not quite..
The post actually said

[qt]turned off by models of color who are between the ages of 18-25[/qt]

So theoretically speaking he/she could be turned on by 'model of colour' over the age of 25..which would I am pretty sure not be racist...possibly ageist though..

Hell, lol sounds like both. *sigh, guess it was silly to have insulted nude photograhers as an aspiring nude art model *embarrassed much

Autonomy II wrote:
MM Formula for Model vs. Photographer Firefights:

Self-entitlement + Artistic, Sensetive Genius Syndrome = Presumed Indignation.

I'm not even going to try to get that one, LOL

Erika Muse wrote:
i believe that any photographer that says he or she wouldnt shoot someone of "color" is rascist.

Why?

Racism is about believing that people of another race are inferior, not about whether you want to photograph them or not.

I don't photograph males, but I don't think they're inferior and I'm not homophobic. They just don't interest me as subjects, in the same way that clothed fashion doesn't interest those photographers who only shoot nudes.

You're making everything too personal.


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:

Why?

Racism is about believing that people of another race are inferior, not about whether you want to photograph them or not.

I don't photograph males, but I don't think they're inferior and I'm not homophobic. They just don't interest me as subjects, in the same way that clothed fashion doesn't interest those photographers who only shoot nudes.

You're making everything too personal.


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

You sexist

Jay Farrell wrote:
You sexist

Clearly

Don Garrett wrote:
I would argue that there is nothing racist about MelissaAnn's statement, it was just to illustrate a point, and she used a couple of your characteristics to make the point. Of course you understood the point, but I think you are being too sensitive in this case. Sorry if this doesn't sit well with you, but that is my opinion.
-Don

Erika Muse wrote:
That example was racist. Her example would have come out of a racist mouth.  I have other characteristics that she could have used in an example. I was stating my opinion of her comment, but im far from sensitive. She is right in her point, but also wrong for her example.

You're missing the point. It doesn't matter what mouth it came. There's no place for threads to bash folks that do things you're not a fan of. This is a social networking site. This rant you posted is going be seen by folks that weren't your target audience. No matter how hard you try to define your story, it won't change the fact those watching this have made their mind and will go with a different model based on you said in this thread. Whatever you post in the forums can have an equal effect as what you post in your portfolio. Think of it as going to a Ducati interview wearing Harley Davidson swag. People will remember you. However, it's in a way you don't want to be remembered by. If you didn't want the reaction you got, maybe you should have chosen a different platform to vent your frustration, or different wording to avoid the confusion it caused.

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:

Why?

Racism is about believing that people of another race are inferior, not about whether you want to photograph them or not.

I don't photograph males, but I don't think they're inferior and I'm not homophobic. They just don't interest me as subjects, in the same way that clothed fashion doesn't interest those photographers who only shoot nudes.

You're making everything too personal.




Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be. Thats just me. But im a lil bit of everything so im not bothered . There's nothing to take personally

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:

Clearly

Lol silly

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
Why?

Racism is about believing that people of another race are inferior, not about whether you want to photograph them or not.

I don't photograph males, but I don't think they're inferior and I'm not homophobic. They just don't interest me as subjects, in the same way that clothed fashion doesn't interest those photographers who only shoot nudes.

You're making everything too personal.


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Not that "homophoblic" makes much sense in the usual meaning, but since you choose not to shoot males regardless of their sexual preference, it's really off.  I'm sure it's just because you understand that females are way more decorative.

Erika Muse wrote:
It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be. Thats just me. But im a lil bit of everything so im not bothered . There's nothing to take personally

This is getting way off topic, but it's not terribly unusual for members of a category to consider other members of that category to be, in general, bad, unreliable, or whatever negative word you want.  Comments don't have to be made by outsiders to be invalid.

Erika Muse wrote:
Hell, lol sounds like both. *sigh, guess it was silly to have insulted nude photograhers as an aspiring nude art model *embarrassed much

Now, put THAT in the OP, and you will have learned something from this.  Combine that with remembering to "just say no" to offers you aren't comfortable with, and it will have been a very productive thread, remarkably.

Erika Muse wrote:
Am i the only model that gets turned off by photographers that shoot nudes ONLY.

I have a portfolio that has all nudes in it.  I'd like to think they're all artistic.

But that's not all I shoot.  I have another MM portfolio that has no nudes in it at all.

Why two portfolios?  B/c I'm retired now, I rarely pay for models, I never charge models, if a paying gig comes my way I usually pass it on to someone else I know who actually needs to make a living from this.  So as a result, I don't pay for VIP status and only have 15 measly photos--which simply doesn't show the range of what I shoot and my interests.

I suspect you may be guilty of assuming that the nudes reflect all of my work as a photographer (just like any other photographer who has all or mostly nudes).  The truth is that most of the fulltime photographers here probably have to shoot a lot of dreck that pays or shoot things that MM is not about:  photos of a family where everyone is 30 pounds overweight with bad acne, boudoir poses of a 50 y.o., resume head shots, wedding portraits, baby portraits, landscapes, building architecture, technical drawings or machinery, corporate or PR shots.  So I bet that probably 90% of the portfolios on MM do not reflect the percentage of what that photographer actually shoot.  If I did so with mine, I'd have 1 artistic nude picture in there, maybe 2 landscapes and then 12 shots from photojournalism work (starving refugees, dead bodies, some riots, carnage from an earthquake or two, maybe a political campaign).   

Ed

BloominGael Photography wrote:
I'd think it would depend on the type of nude.  Photogs who shoot only certain styles should raise an eyebrow anyway?  Variety is good...

Variety is good ... in your opinion.  I am not positive, but I think that Ansel Adams only shot nature / landscape style images, I may be wrong here.  Should that have raised an eyebrow of concern?  Consistently doing what you do best and are best at doing is better... in my opinion!

Erika Muse wrote:
It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be

So if a black photographer shoots only white models, that's NOT racist, but if a white photographer shoots only white models that IS racist?

smh 




Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Chuckarelei wrote:
Ok, let me guess? You want to shoot with certain photographers. But they say they only shoot you if you do nude. And you get totally turned off because of that?

Erika Muse wrote:
Yes.

Aha! Now we're getting somewhere.

As my portfolios will evidence, I shoot a wide variety of things, but I've found that life is a whole lot easier when I work with models who shoot nudes, even if the project doesn't require nudity.  Why?  In my experience models who shoot nudes have already taken care of most of the questions that all models have to deal with, such as boundaries, interests, etc. whereas models who do not often have not dealt with them fully. 

Then too, there is the matter of range.  If the cost were the same, would you rather have a car that will do nothing more than carry you back and forth to work, or would you rather have one that can carry the groceries when you shop or take you on weekend trips to the country?  Even if you're not going to shoot everything the model is capable of, it's much more convenient to work with the one who can do more than the one who can do less. 

And it is quite acceptable to ask a model who shoots nudes to do a few poses clothed, but if you ask a model who doesn't shoot nudes to shoot a few poses unclothed, the screams of "I respect myself!" and "I've got a boyfriend" rebound.  It's just easier to plan a shoot without all that drama and a heck of a lot easier to handle last minute inspiration when it hits if you're not trying to deal with someone carrying a lot of excess baggage.

So I always ask.  In the rare cases where a specific model is the only one available who is really qualified for the shoot and she doesn't shoot nudes, then of course I'll use her.  But the reality is that, at least in the larger markets, there many models capable of carrying off just about any shoot, even in a TF situation.  Where pay is involved, there are usually hundreds.  So what's the point of bothering with the potential problems? 

The photographer's decision to work only with models who shoot nudes is exactly as reasonable and appropriate as the model's decision not to shoot them.  Both can serve each other and themselves best by just politely saying, "Thanks for considering me," and going on to the next opportunity.

All IMHO, as always.

afplcc wrote:
starving refugees, dead bodies, some riots, carnage from an earthquake or two, maybe a political campaign

You're repeating yourself.

Erika Muse wrote:
It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be. Thats just me. But im a lil bit of everything so im not bothered . There's nothing to take personally

No it doesn't. If I don't have a vision for a BLACK model or a LATIN model or a WHITE model.. I won't shoot them.

And "not wanted to shoot people of color"... so as Stefano said... well.. he said it perfectly. That's a really ignorant statement.

This thread should just be locked, it's all kinds of waste. Don't shoot nudes and move on.

Are you going to tell a mechanic that only works on vintage Porsche cars that he must work with your dirty, clunky truck? No. Or how about vice versa? People can have preference, welcome to life.

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
Why?

Racism is about believing that people of another race are inferior, not about whether you want to photograph them or not.

I don't photograph males, but I don't think they're inferior and I'm not homophobic. They just don't interest me as subjects, in the same way that clothed fashion doesn't interest those photographers who only shoot nudes.

You're making everything too personal.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

hmmm ....thats not what i recall you previously saying

you have been challenged on this before and i recall you saying that you didnt want to be labelled an "ethnic" photographer within the industry ( whatever the fuck that means ) which seems to me that its a bit more than your personal tastes regarding  the matter

and speaking of making things "personal " in the forums you should be able to take what you dish out , huh ?

Erika Muse wrote:
It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be. Thats just me. But im a lil bit of everything so im not bothered . There's nothing to take personally

Friendly word of advice since you are new
There are certain topics that are best avoided on MM
Race discussions are in top 3
They never end well

Star wrote:
There are many photographers on MM who are professional fashion photographers who only book nude shoots with MM llamas. Even if you are willing to pay them, if you do not have the look they want they will say no to any shoot other than a nude shoot.

OP you have three choices-

1. shoot with the photographer who's work you like and do a nude shoot

2. offer to pay the photographer their day rate for a clothed shoot. They may or my not agree to this

3. forget this photographer and look for another one

Some things to remember,

no one is entitled to a photo shoot

just because someone shoots certain types of content with one person doesn't mean they will agree to do it with another

it is easier to move on than to get angry

well said.

Erika Muse wrote:
It depends on the race of the person not wanting to shoot people of "color". If the person were not of color, i would call it what i believe it to be. Thats just me. But im a lil bit of everything so im not bothered . There's nothing to take personally

I don't shoot retarded people. Does that mean I am against the handicapped? 

If I had downs syndrome, could I then justify not shooting retarded subjects?

Actually... that gives me a photo idea...

Autonomy II wrote:
So what ever happened to that scared cat thing?

Garry k wrote:

hmmm ....thats not what i recall you previously saying

you have been challenged on this before and i recall you saying that you didnt want to be labelled an "ethnic" photographer within the industry ( whatever the fuck that means ) which seems to me that its a bit more than your personal tastes regarding  the matter

and speaking of making things "personal " in the forums you should be able to take what you dish out , huh ?

Duuuuude. Just chillax and/or take it to PM...

P I X I E wrote:

I missed that kiktty!

Autonomy II wrote:
So what ever happened to that scared cat thing?

they broke the site. Now it requires you to add :  : to it

Darkness Overcomes Me wrote:
I don't shoot retarded people. Does that mean I am against the handicapped? 

If I had downs syndrome, could I then justify not shooting retarded subjects?

Actually... that gives me a photo idea...

delete